Article - New Term: 'Super Owner'

I'm going for the Super Deplorable Owner title myself.
gotta love Faux News

only 17?

some people are just not holding up their end of the bargain.

I read the article this morning but dont really buy it... I know far more people who own just one or a couple of guns compared to someone like myself who would qualify for this "title" many times over.

Sadly now, I was a super owner until that tragic night the boating accident occurred.

I would imagine that a LOT of people on this forum are "super" owners.

Click to expand...

Active Members: 6,396
Yet I think that number pales in comparison to the 322m people in the USA at .00198% +/-...Thats even assuming we all meet the criteria, a few have already stated in the thread they do not.. Course many members are members of other boards diluting that number a bit further.

And thus it came down from the hovel on PA Ave," You didn't earn that!!!" Thou shalt share thy arsenals with those who don't have any guns. They shall be distributed the same manner as income tax credits are.

I would imagine that many anti-gun folks are happy to hear that all those guns they keep hearing about aren't well distributed.

Gun owning ammo hoarders have done a dandy job of effectively banning me from buying .22LR for several years.

IF someone asks you if you are a super owner, tell them "Don't ask and I don't have to tell".

In reality, most of these survey type things with firearms are cheap media junk filler because of the socially acceptable answer thesis. Things that are frowned upon by society get under reported in surveys while things that are considered approved are actually overreported in survey research.

There is a research design that avoids that but it is hellishly expensive because it involves a separate step--personal interviews by a trusted person to error check the survey to establish some kind of known unknown error rate to the survey.

Used to do Govt. ag field surveys and error checking work in graduate school.

BTW, internet surveys are even worse junk

This is part of the narrative that the last decade's record of ever larger record gun sales doesn't actually mean gun ownership is increasing.

They have been trying to make that be The Accepted Truth for a long time. You could almost say that in the face of statistics showing gun ownership is going up in traditionally low-ownership demographics (women, minorities) it is believed more and more firmly by fewer and fewer people.

So this is an exhortation for the other 97% to tool up, right?

(also, their claimed overall rate of ownership is stupid low)

Who in their right mind would answer any of the questions?

The only time I plead the fifth; "how many guns do your own?". I can't recall.

I guess I'm a "Super Owner" too. I just heard the Dr. Pepper song but substituted Super Owner for Pepper. I would say at 17 they are just getting started.

Somewhere recently I read "triple double is the new super duper"

So I guess I'm a triple super owner.

Geeeeesshh .... I must be a meta-phantasmagorical super-duper super owner!!!!
How many guns?

I dunno. Between my collection of black powder revolvers & pistols ....
nahhh, I won't guess, it might be perceived as a brag.

*SIGH!*​

I guess I am Super-Dooper (or an idiot because I've lost count). I only count the NFA and C&R ones

Mike

I didn't read the linked article, but I did read the excerpt posted in the OP.

Didn't come across as negative to me.

For those who wonder where the figure of 17 guns comes from, do the math: population of 320 million, 60 million gun owners, 320+ million guns.

3% of 320 million is 9.6 million owners, half of 320 million guns is 160 million, divided by 9.6 million owners is 16.6 guns rounded up to 17.

That leaves 160 million guns owned by 50.4 million gun owners leaves 3.1 each.

Super owner? Not hard to do. I'm just trying to get halfway there, others own entire collections - but they don't plan to take them all out the same trip and shoot them. Many are never shot, their usefulness as a tool over, they are simply valued as a collectible to be possessed, not fired. Like, all early '03 Springfields or an ancestral Pennsylvania rifle.

Frankly, if someone didn't like guns, the superowners are very much NOT an issue as so many of their guns aren't ever used at all. It's the owner of just three who they fear.

I seen this a few days ago and meant to post on it. I can't wait to read through all of this.

Not sure why the redundant thread was closed & not merged, but whatever...

Considering 1% of the US controls half its wealth (or something like that), I'd say we gun owners are an incredibly egalitarian lot.

While a *shocking* number, it's neither surprising nor outrageous. Unsurprisingly, guns cost money, so those with money are able to spend money on guns. Those with more money are able to spend money on guns more frequently. Those who do not spend money on guns never accumulate guns, those who do, do. Those who spend more than a pittance on the hobby generally become enthusiasts, and begin devoting larger portions of their discretionary income than would someone who does not, even if they have the money.

The result is a very heavy weighting on the most well-heeled *and* passionate gun owners when it comes to possession. Similar to what you see with money, and it stacks up even steeper generationally due to inheritance for the most part, just like money. Only people with no understanding of economics who can't see further than the tip of their own noses can't understand this. I'll bet a smaller fraction of the population owns half the notable oil paintings, half the bottles of wine costing more than 300$, jewelry, and half of any number of other luxury items (yes, guns are a luxury). None of those things have much bearing on the sanity of the owners, and neither do firearms.

The next interesting angle of the story, to me, would be what fraction of the population owns the majority of transferrable machineguns. I have a feeling it's only a couple hundred people, if that. Obviously we'll never know, since neither does the ATF in charge of knowing this.

78% of the adult population doesn't own guns.

Click to expand...

This figure is literally the highest I have EVER seen from any source claiming to have determined the number of American gun owners. It's typically closer to 30% for the low end, and IIRC often polls even higher when a Clinton isn't actively running on a gun control platform


*It's funny; when you search for these graphs, nearly half up near the top of the search hits all claim ownership is declining, and almost ALL these stop at exactly 2010. Almost completely omitting the Obama Gun Renaissance (one poll through 2016 shows a suspicious cliff-drop in the percentage that mirrors 1994, but otherwise a maybe 8% decline since the 70's that's pretty unconvincing given the degree of urbanization that's occurred since then)

Wow; would you lookit; the number goes down whenever a significant political panic hits. Funny how so many Americans gave up their guns after an AWB that grandfathered all existing guns & effective a then-tiny segment of the market. Oh, and then again after the AWB expired and tremendous pressure was brought trying to reinstate it. Oh, and a steady if slight decline during the Obama reign, during which gun sales set new records year after year in a fairly stagnant economy that also saw enormous expansion of concealed carry permits and/or owner registrations across the nation.

BTW, going from 47% to 22% means 55 million adult Americans disarmed. The very notion is laughable. The article also doesn't seem to pry into whether the likely income-distribution of firearms owners --we're all barefoot dirt farming hicks in flyover country, remember?-- could even conceivably support the output of the entire civilian firearms industry (ammo, accessories, and etc in addition to guns), especially with the 3/19 distribution they claim.

TCB

I actually don't exactly know how many guns I have total.

...about half of all gun owners fall into Rich’s previous demographic: they own a single gun, maybe two. Another third of American gun owners own between three and seven guns.

That top 14 percent of gun owners — a group of 7.7 million people, or 3 percent of American adults — own between about eight and 140 guns each. The average is 17.

These super-owners include collectors with elaborately curated selections of historical firearms, serious hunters, firearms instructors, gunsmiths, people who love tinkering with and customizing their firearms, and Americans worried about feeding or defending their families in the wake of a disaster scenario. But you don’t have to be prepping for the breakdown of civilization to end up with 17 guns. In fact, gun enthusiasts say, it’s surprisingly easy to get to 17 — especially because many Americans inherit multiple guns from their parents and grandparents.

“I’m from Texas, and I just have an assload of guns,” said...

Click to expand...

Sounds right to me. What's the problem?

Boy,

can't imagine what they would call someone owning 30+ firearms IN BELGIUM/EUROPE.

I read somewhere that the average Belgian firearms-owner has just shy of 2 firearms, so I make up for over 30 people with just one gun,

so that statistic is correct, 3% of the owners (ie me) own 50% of the firearms (30 out of 60) (I know this is all BS, but fun nevertheless)

How do you know there is a lawyer in the room? They'll tell you.

Same as pilots.

Lois Beckett loves that term 'super owner'...it is in the title of at least 2 of her recent articles. And she seems to love making any gun owner appear to be crazy. On a side note, she looks to be about 16....precious little snowflake.

17 guns? Not very many really. But it probably seems like a huge amount to non-enthusiasts. Like 300 beanie-babies seems excessive to many, or 17 shades of bright blue hair dye, or........ hey wait Lois, HOW MANY SHOES ARE IN YOUR CLOSET? Super Owner!

BTW: FOX news will rot your brain.